Reason.com

Print|Email

New at Reason

| August 22, 2005

If it were really the case that terrorists "hate us for our freedoms," we'd be getting more popular with Al Qaeda every month. Unfortunately, as Doug Bandow notices, we seem to be pouring fuel on the fire.

← The $1.3 Trillion War | Main | Our Trump Card →

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.

|8.22.05 @ 4:28PM|

Damn, there must be some serious freedom in those Abu Ghraib photos.

|8.22.05 @ 4:38PM|

"Observes Robert Pape: "Since suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation and not Islamic fundamentalism, the use of heavy military force to transform Muslim societies over there, if you would, is only likely to increase the number of suicide terrorists coming at us... Suicide terrorism is not a supply-limited phenomenon where there are just a few hundred around the world willing to do it because they are religious fanatics. It is a demand-driven phenomenon."

and:

"The point is not that their assessments are accurate or U.S. policies are unjustified. Nor should London and Washington precipitously retreat from Iraq and allow terrorist acts to determine national policy. But policymakers must recognize that intervention�particularly the prolonged intervention being planned for Iraq�vastly expands the pool of people willing to listen to, and follow, terrorist demagogues."

Well, lordy me! And all this time I thought Osama wanted me burned alive because I used my First Amendment rights to be mouthy prick.

gaius marius|8.22.05 @ 4:41PM|

so much of what mr bandow says is so obvious as to be common sense. unfortunately, the iraq issue in america has become yet another example of how irrational people really can be, and how little reality actually infringes on the human decision-making process.

an article like this, as well-meaning and factual as it is, will simply become fodder for more political polarization. we in america have lost the ability to solve problems through discourse and creativity -- instead, the shouting and stress created by unresolved issues simply piles up along domestic fault lines.

i sincerely wonder how far we are from partisan civil violence sometimes, when most of us cannot even grasp simple truths about vitally important issues.

|8.22.05 @ 4:48PM|

i agree with you gaius - gasp - but i really do wonder where this time was when people solved large-scale political issues through discourse.

unless by "discourse" you mean "pickaxe handle."

|8.22.05 @ 5:01PM|

Come on, if this discourse were really rational. We being discussing how to respond to the TACTIC of terrorism currently being used against us; and not parading around about we are going to win a WAR on it.
Hopefully a majority of americans will wake up to the fact that invading armies CAUSE terrorism, not eliminate it.

|8.22.05 @ 5:03PM|

Worst.President.Ever.

I'm not sure if that's true (odds are it's not), but if we end up creating in Iraq a violent, unstable, theocracy, then I cannot imagine a more exactly wrong and disasterous response to the threats facing America than the one the Bush regime has come up with. And not only wrong, but dishonestly promoted and accompanied by such wrongheaded and expensive domestic policies as to defy the imagination. They botched the Afghan response by trying to do it on the cheap and letting UBL and Co. scamper into Pakistan, and they have botched Iraq in so many ways that entire classes will be taught on it in military schools and diplomat training courses of the future. The fact that this is not abstract at all, but is of immediate and deadly concern, just frightens the shit out of me.

|8.22.05 @ 5:22PM|


Suicide terrorism is not a supply-limited phenomenon where there are just a few hundred around the world willing to do it because they are religious fanatics. It is a demand-driven phenomenon.


And how exactly do you go about explaining this to a population that has no clue how a free market system evolves and works? Seems to me terrorism arises to fill a niche similar to the way markets operate. Policy makers who don't understand the first thing about free markets cannot in turn understand the causes and effects of terrorism.

|8.22.05 @ 5:51PM|

Hopefully a majority of americans will wake up to the fact that invading armies CAUSE terrorism, not eliminate it.

It is striking how many counter-examples there are to this seeming truism .

I didn't see a sudden outpouring of terrorism against the Iraqis when they invaded Kuwait, for example.

For that matter, I the war against the Russian invaders of Afghanistan was a pretty straightforward guerrilla war not noted for terrorist activity (although the lines can get pretty blurred).

Odd, also, that most of the terrorists targeting the US come from countries that the US has never invaded - Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria.

OBL and AQ rose to prominence in their attacks against the US when we hadn't invaded anyone in the Mideast (our deterrent force in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait at the time can hardly be called invaders or occupiers, after all, as they were there at the request of the governments to repel an actual invasion and deter a further one). Indeed, during the Cole, the African Embassy bombings, and 9/11 US troops were involved in trying to protect Muslims in Eastern Europe from ethnic cleansing - again, kind of the opposite of "invading."

Suicide terrorism is not a supply-limited phenomenon where there are just a few hundred around the world willing to do it because they are religious fanatics. It is a demand-driven phenomenon.

While this sounds all cool and market-jargony, I'm not sure that it makes any sense. Economics is based on rational people acting in their perceived self-interest. Politics, especially religious politics, is by definition not rational, etc.

Even in its own terms, we have seen that the jihadists have some serious problems recruiting genuine suicide bombers. The amount they have to pay has gone up, there are stories of blackmail and coercion, the 9/11 rank and file may not have even known they were on a suicide mission, etc.

M1EK|8.22.05 @ 5:58PM|

"Worst.President.Ever."

Jeff, did you read the memo? Kerry or Gore would have been worse.

I'll make sure you get another copy of that memo,
M1EK

|8.22.05 @ 6:04PM|

M1EK--

Don't worry-- I just noticed I have it right here under the "Why Getting a Blowjob is Worse than the Worstest Thing Ever, Including Ill-Conceived Wars that Kill Lots of People" memo. I am behind on my reading apparently.

|8.22.05 @ 6:04PM|

From what I understand, polls show less hate for us than 4 years ago.

Mission accomplished.

|8.22.05 @ 6:05PM|

Saying invading armies was a oversimplication of the cause of terrorism. There are many causes. But in places were terrorism was already a tactic, give me an example where invading army reduced the number of terrorist acts.
Perphaps, I should have stated: "Invading armies, encourage acts of terrorism."

|8.22.05 @ 6:14PM|

RC Dean

england "invades" ireland, increase in terrorism
US invades north america, increase in terrorism
israel invades palestine, increase in terrorism
US invades Iraq, increase in terrorism

Show me an example of invasions that decreased terrorism... not examples were terrorism wasnt part of the equation to begin with.

|8.22.05 @ 6:45PM|

"US invades north america, increase in terrorism"

That's not entirely fair. After killing several million Native Americans there was a noticeable decline in terrorist violence.

|8.22.05 @ 6:57PM|

Iran is next on the Bush "Spreading Freedom and Democracy tour"...What Bandow, and seemingly most observations on terrorist motivations miss, is that radical Muslims don't commit acts of terror bacause they "hate" us, or our values...they do it because our values threaten their power over others as they spread to people in countries dominated by fundamentalists. Our imperial hubris just gives them an excuse, but what they really want is to maintain their personal power, not praise Allah...

|8.22.05 @ 7:53PM|

It really is about the oil. The oil brought our freedoms to their doorstep. Oil money, combined with modern transportation and telecommunication, has brought them in turn to our doorstep. They now do because they now can.

|8.22.05 @ 8:15PM|

Thanks Doug for this scorching indictment of the scatterbrained justifications for Iraq which Bush has given.

We need to do what they did to Alex in "A Clockwork Orange" and pry Bush's eyelids open and make him read the whole article.

|8.22.05 @ 9:34PM|

Finally, a voice who can wade through all the conflicting information and jump to a wildly plausible assertion!

Now Bandow can move on to explaining the merits of Intelligent Design.

|8.22.05 @ 9:39PM|

coarsetad: Not to get all up in your smarty pants, but USA was already in North America when established. It was England that did the invading. Most of the rest of the contintent now under USA dominon was bought from French and Spanish invaders. Please adust your loathing accordingly.

Jason Pappas|8.22.05 @ 11:20PM|

Why is it that year after year I see polls showing that 90% of Muslims in country X hate us or 95% in country Y hate us and yet I keep reading ?oh, they are going to hate us now??

Are you really worried about that last 5-10 percent?

|8.22.05 @ 11:44PM|

Why is it that year after year I see polls showing that 90% of Muslims in country X hate us or 95% in country Y hate us and yet I keep reading ?oh, they are going to hate us now??

Guess we'd better bomb country Z just to make sure.

|8.22.05 @ 11:54PM|

Is there an echo in here?

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/articles/050829/29barone.htm

|8.23.05 @ 12:22AM|

USA was already in North America when established. It was England that did the invading. Most of the rest of the contintent now under USA dominon was bought from French and Spanish invaders.

And, the Spanish and French had authority to sell it, how? And, they convinced us to use biological warfare and lock Indians up in Concentration Camps on the Plains and Pacific Coast Indians, when? Just while we're getting all up in people's smarty pants...

|8.23.05 @ 6:14AM|

Most.Boring.Comments.Ever.

TallDave|8.23.05 @ 9:14AM|

Of course they hate us for our freedoms; when you look at their desired end-state this is inarguable.

They just don't like our brand of repression much, either.

TallDave|8.23.05 @ 9:17AM|

And the Native Americans the Europeans took it from had slaughtered the previous inhabitants and took it from them, who had slaughtered the previous inhabitants and taken it from them...

What was the point again? Oh yes: WESTERN OPPRESSORS BAD, BAD, BAD!!

TallDave|8.23.05 @ 9:20AM|

Actually, polls are finding they are hating us less since we started getting serious about promoting freedom and democracy.

http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10002589.shtml

|8.23.05 @ 9:53AM|

Unfortunately, the dual attacks in London last month clearly showed that the Iraq war has not reduced the terrorist threat.


Anybody who starts out with an asinine statement such as this is not fit to be read any further.

In 2001, four hijacked airplanes killed 3000 people.

In 2002, a single bomb killed over 200 people in Bali.

For those of you unable to comprehend a calendar, both of those dates are before the Iraq invasion.

The Madrid train bombing in 2004 killed less than 200. Then the London bombs (a bunch of them!) killed only about 50 in 2005.

Therefore, Bandow's statement is an obvious non sequitur. The best the jihadists can do after the Iraq invasion so far does not come anywhere close to their best efforts before the invasion.

It's possible to have a rational discussion of the pros and cons of the Iraq invasion. But not when one side persists in serving up obvious nonsense.

|8.23.05 @ 10:06AM|

Douglas is right. Even for an Iraq/Islamic Terror thread this sucks.

Most Popular Stories

Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey

advertisements

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptions

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:


(310) 367-6109

Editorial & Production Offices:

3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245

Home|About|Advertise|Privacy|Contact
Copyright 2012, Reason.com